Daughter of the English King: Wife of William de Burgh (died 1206), lord of Connaught
Douglas Richardson
Sometime ago, John Ravilious and I presented a working theory that
William de Burgh (died 1206), lord of Connaught in Ireland, may have
married either an illegitimate daughter of King Henry II or of King
Richard I. At the time, neither John or I had any evidence to support
the theory, other than references to kinship made by the English royal
family at various times to William de Burgh's great-grandson, Sir
Richard de Burgh (died 1326), Earl of Ulster.
Since our original posts on Sir William de Burgh's wife's identity, the
new DNB has become available. As indicated below, the updated
biography of William de Burgh (died 1206) supposes that William de
Burgh was married to a daughter of Domnall Mór Ó Briain:
"According to one Irish source de Burgh was married to a daughter of
Domnall Mór Ó Briain, which is consistent with the fact that he was
frequently accompanied by his Ó Briain allies, hereditary enemies of
the Mac Carthaig and the Ó Conchobhair, in his numerous campaigns in
Desmond and Connacht. Presumably this alliance gave him the means to
prosecute his territorial interests in Desmond and Connacht, while
leaving his castles on the Thomond frontier secure from attack." END
OF QUOTE.
Elsewhere, Stewart Baldwin has indicated that the primary source which
makes the claim that William de Burgh married a daughter of Domnall
Mór is the Book of Lecan (an early fifteenth century manuscript),
folio 82r. It is in a genealogical tract on the sept known as U Maine
(later Hy-Many), and was given with an English translation in John
O'Donovan's "The Tribes and Customs of Hy-Many" (Dublin, 1843), p. 44
(Irish) and p. 45 (English translation). The tract, as it exists now,
could not have been written before the year 1378, for it refers (p.49
of O'Donovan's translation) to a "Muichertach the Bishop" who is known
to have become bishop in that year. It was Mr. Baldwin's view in 2001
that if William de Burgh really married a daughter of Domnall Mór,
that she was a later second wife and probably not the mother of his son
and heir, Richard de Burgh (died 1243), also lord of Connaught.
So could William de Burgh have married an illegitimate daughter of King
Henry II or Richard I after all? Quite by chance, in a conversation I
had recently with Dr. David Kelley, FASG, he indicated that he knew of
a source which indicated just that. He has since kindly forwarded to
me a page from the book, Analecta Hibernica, No. 18, The O'Clery Book
of Genealogies (Irish MSS. Comm.), edited by Seamus Pender, published
in 1951.
On page 193 is a somewhat fabulous genealogical account of a cadet
branch of the Burgh family who were lords of Connaught. Quite
surprisingly, in this source, the mother of Richard de Burgh (died
1243) [son of William de Burgh "the Conqueror of Connaught"] is
identified as "the daughter of the Saxon king." Dr. Kelley informs me
that "in Ireland, the Normans became Saxons." Therefore, according to
Dr. Kelley, the correct translation of the text would be that Richard
de Burgh's mother was the "daughter of the English king."
Below is the part of the Burgh pedigree in the O'Clery Genealogies
which deals with Richard de Burgh and his father, William de Burgh:
"... Sir Uilliam Burc (Una ingen Feidhlimthe mic Cathail croibhdeirg a
mhathair), m. Uilliam óig frisi n-abarthaoi Uilliam átha an chip m
Riocaird mhoir (ingen righ Saxan a mathair), m. Uilliam concuurer .i.
Uilliam Adelmisione m Risdeird m Antoin .i. iárla king, Sir Seon a
ainm oile m Sir Balbhuaidh m Sir Badbduinn m Sir Crass .i. cenn na
ccriostaidhedh m King Rolont oig m King Rolont mhoir m Charroluis óig
m Charroluis mhoir na Fraince."
I present the pedigree above, not because it is necessarily entirely
reliable, but because it presents a tradition (rightly or wrongly) that
the wife of Sir William de Burgh (died 1206) and the mother of his
heir, Richard, was the daughter of the English king. At this
junction, I think it is safe to say this matter deserves further study.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www.royalancestry.net
CED
Douglas Richardson wrote:
> Dear Newsgroup ~
>
> Sometime ago, John Ravilious and I presented a working theory that
> William de Burgh (died 1206), lord of Connaught in Ireland, may have
> married either an illegitimate daughter of King Henry II or of King
> Richard I. At the time, neither John or I had any evidence to support
> the theory, other than references to kinship made by the English royal
> family at various times to William de Burgh's great-grandson, Sir
> Richard de Burgh (died 1326), Earl of Ulster.
To the Newsgroup:
Surprise!
I agree with Richardson and John Ravilious that there are connections
between the Burgh family and Henry II which have not been made apparent
in the records now available. For more than two decades I have trod
the path between those families looking for clues. So far, the facts
don't go where logic carries me. Three questions:
Who was the mother of Hubert de Burgh and his brother Bp.Geoffrey (and
not neccessarily of their brother, William)?
Who were the parents of Margaret, wife of Richard de Burgh, earl of
Ulster (d. 1326)?
How do we account for the rapid rise (apparently from no place) (a) of
the Burghs in Ireland and (b) of Hubert de Burgh (almost singular for a
man not in the Church)?
CED
wils...@paradise.net
The family of De Burgh ranks among the most ancient in the united
kingdoms. Hubert de Burgh earl of kent, was one of the greatest
subjects in Europe,in the reings of king John and Henry III.
His uncle, Adelm de Burgh settled in Ireland and was ancestor of
Richard de Burgh, Lord of Connaught and Trim, who d. 1243, leaving
two sons, Walter earl of Ulster, and William, ancestor of the earls of
Clanricarde.
Brendan Wilson
To Reply: remove [.] from around the dot. Stops Spam
Researching: Lowther, Westmoreland. Clifford, Cumberland /Yorkshire. Brennan, Kilhile, Ballyhack Wexford. Fitzgibbon, Kingsland French Park Rosscommon,Ireland. Prendergast & Donohue, Cappoquin Lismore, Waterford. Starr & Turner, Romford Essex,England.
Peters, Hamburg & Ballarat Victoria.Lund, Hamburg.Lowther & McCormack,Dublin.
WJho...@aol.com
wils...@paradise.net[.]nz writes:
<< From; Debrett's Peerage - Scotland & Ireland 1825 page 781
The family of De Burgh ranks among the most ancient in the united
kingdoms. Hubert de Burgh earl of kent, was one of the greatest
subjects in Europe,in the reings of king John and Henry III.
His uncle, Adelm de Burgh settled in Ireland and was ancestor of
Richard de Burgh, Lord of Connaught and Trim, who d. 1243, leaving
two sons, Walter earl of Ulster, and William, ancestor of the earls of
Clanricarde. >>
However, when secondary sources conflict. You have to go back to primary
ones.
So this doesn't add anything to the discussion, imho.
This just repeats more of what's already been said and unsaid.
Will
Jwc...@aol.com
I don`t think Hubert de Burgh`s rise to power was all
that rapid. Yes, He was an official of some sort under Richard I and was made
justiciar under John and retained by the regent William Marshal, Earl of
Pembroke under and after whose death in 1222 He fought the attempts of King Louis
VIII of France to gain the English throne and was rewarded with the Earldom of
Kent in 1227. In one website I saw that He married a daughter of William de
Vernon, Earl of Devon in about 1200. He is stated to have died in 1243 and his
Earldom died with him though He left two sons... hardly the treatment one would
expect of a natural son of Richard or John. Could He have been the son of a
bastard Gloucester daughter or perhaps a Cornwall ? Or maybe his wife`s mother
was.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Douglas Richardson
I found a reference online just now which states that there are several
"communications" regarding the early Burgh family which are published
in Notes and Queries, 4th Series.
Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah
Website: www.royalancestry.net
CED
Jwc...@aol.com wrote:
> Dear Douglas,
> I don`t think Hubert de Burgh`s rise to power was all
> that rapid. Yes, He was an official of some sort under Richard I and was made
> justiciar under John and retained by the regent William Marshal, Earl of
> Pembroke under and after whose death in 1222 He fought the attempts of King Louis
> VIII of France to gain the English throne and was rewarded with the Earldom of
> Kent in 1227.
Dear James,
Two comments:
One-- Hubert de Burgh's earldom was a consequence of his marriage to,
Margaret, the daughter of William the Lion, king of Scotland. The
grant of the earldom had a limitation on its remainder, the grant was
to Hubert and his heirs of the body of Margaret. Hubert's son, John,
was the issue of hubert's first marriage to Beatrice Warenne (heiress
of a cadet branch of the Warenne family. This was her seond marriage,
the first being to Doon Bardolf (who held the barony of Wormegay, by
tenure), by whom she had an heir, William Bardolf. Hubert's son, John,
inherited what was left of his father's estates after the fall.
Hubert's only known issue by his marriage to Margaret of Scotland was a
daughter, Margaret (who had an ill-fated marriage to Richard de Clare)
died during the lives of her parents.
> In one website I saw that He married a daughter of William de
> Vernon, Earl of Devon in about 1200.
Two-- This marriage, though contracted, did not take place. This
contract has been the subject of some question. How was an otherwise
unknown knight (we only assume his being a knight at this time) able to
make arrangement to marry an heiress of the earl of Devon? What
intervened to stop the marriage?
CED
WJho...@aol.com
writes:
<< One-- Hubert de Burgh's earldom was a consequence of his marriage to,
Margaret, the daughter of William the Lion, king of Scotland. The
grant of the earldom had a limitation on its remainder, the grant was
to Hubert and his heirs of the body of Margaret. >>
But even before this, his second wife Isabella de Clare was the ex and first
wife (annuled) of John the King of England.
Isabella was a great-granddaughter of Henry I and her father was Earl of
Gloucester.
So already by this marriage, Hubert, is marrying pretty far up the ladder.
In contrast, his first wife, seems like a nobody :) Just in contrast, mind
you.
Will Johnson
atsar...@hotmail.com
One might consider that one of the criticisms leveled at John by the
nobility was his employment and promotion of men of lower birth (thus
dependent on him). If Hubert made himself useful, he might well expect
to receive the hand of a great heiress -- such heiresses were wards of
the king, and their marriages (which did not cost the king anything
much) were major kinds of payment given loyal subjects. William
Marshall, whose family was also unknown, was a poor knight who made
himself useful to Henry II and Richard I -- and in return was given the
hand of the heiress of Pembroke, as well as the Marshalship that gave
him a surname. William d'Aubigny was an unknown (French) knight who
made himself useful to Henry I, married his widow, and received Arundel
castle (and earldom) from the usurper, King Stephen. Happened all the
time.
As for Hubert's royal second marriage, the princess was a hostage in
England, and Hubert her keeper. They became intimate, and Scots royalty
was unimportant enough at the time that the English kings could toss
their daughters around at will.
No adult illegitimate daughter of either Henry II or Richard I is
mentioned in any source -- in marked contrast to those of Henry I and
John.
Jean Coeur de Lapin
WJho...@aol.com
atsar...@hotmail.com writes:
<< As for Hubert's royal second marriage, the princess was a hostage in
England, and Hubert her keeper. They became intimate, and Scots royalty
was unimportant enough at the time that the English kings could toss
their daughters around at will. >>
Do you mean third marriage ?
CED
atsar...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On: Hubert de Burgh
>
> One might consider that one of the criticisms leveled at John by the
> nobility was his employment and promotion of men of lower birth (thus
> dependent on him). If Hubert made himself useful, he might well expect
> to receive the hand of a great heiress -- such heiresses were wards of
> the king, and their marriages (which did not cost the king anything
> much) were major kinds of payment given loyal subjects. William
> Marshall, whose family was also unknown, was a poor knight who made
> himself useful to Henry II and Richard I -- and in return was given the
> hand of the heiress of Pembroke, as well as the Marshalship that gave
> him a surname. William d'Aubigny was an unknown (French) knight who
> made himself useful to Henry I, married his widow, and received Arundel
> castle (and earldom) from the usurper, King Stephen. Happened all the
> time.
>
> As for Hubert's royal second marriage, the princess was a hostage in
> England, and Hubert her keeper. They became intimate, and Scots royalty
> was unimportant enough at the time that the English kings could toss
> their daughters around at will.
To the Newsgroup:
Hubert's marriage to Margaret of Scotland (his 3rd marriage) occured in
1221, while Hubert, as justiciar, was de facto master of England,
before Henry III had the power to say yea or nay to anything.
Margaret had been scheduled to marry Henry III; however, at the Treaty
of Norham. everything got turned around: Margaret was given to Hubert
and a sister of Henry III was promised to Alexander, son of William the
Lion, king of the Scots. Her intended marriage to the boy king was the
reason Margaret was in England. Intended brides of boys in the royal
family were, by custom, expected to live in England until the marriage.
(Alice of France, the intended of Richard I is another example.)
This switch was in all probabilty engineered by Hubert for his own
benefit with the willing cooperation of the Scottish king. Which
raises another question: why would William the Lion let his daughter be
married to a nobody?
CED
WJho...@aol.com
In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:16:13 AM Pacific Standard Time,
lees...@cox.net writes:
This switch was in all probabilty engineered by Hubert for his own
benefit with the willing cooperation of the Scottish king. Which
raises another question: why would William the Lion let his daughter be
married to a nobody?
The ex-husband of the ex-queen of England wasn't by that time a nobody.
Jwc...@aol.com
I sent the following e-mail to lees...@cox.net
yesterday with full intent of sharing the information with the Newsgroup as a
whole. William the Lion, King of Scots couldn`t object to Hubert de Burgh`s
marrying his daughter Margaret as He had been dead two years longer (1214) than
had King John of England. A lot of important persons died in England and
Scotland between 1214-1221. According to Alan Young`s "The Comyns 1212-1314 p 27
William Comyn, Earl of Buchan witnessed the marriage at York in 1221 of King
Alexander II of the Scots and Henry III`s sister Joan of England. In March 1229
Alexander II gave to his younger sister Margaret for her marriage, all of
Tynedale, stipulating however that He would retain to himself the homage of William
Comyn, Earl of Buchan and his heirs for the said Tynedale, thereby sending
Hubert de Burgh a clear message of his displeasure and that of Comyn for his
daring to circumvent their plans. Had Margaret married Henry III, the Earl of
Buchan would of course done homage for his substancial Tynedale properties to him
together with the homage He already owed to him.
Jwc...@aol.com
I have had an e-mail from CED whose server to
SGM currently appears to be down. He wishes me to acknowledge for him that He
was in error concerning the date of King William the Lion of the Scots` death
date.
ADRIANC...@aol.com
Clarence Ellis, or has anything constructive been given in the thread here?
Its time I climbed a long way forward in this tree (well it would be but for
the problem over the connection to the Lord Clanricardes, the Earl of which
eventually ended up in a branch of my Browne ancestors - an indirect ancestor)
to the Burkes (aka de Burgh) of co Mayo, Ireland during the 16 century. If
you imagine the problems a Welshmen may have with _Price_, that will give you
some idea of the Burkes of co Mayo at this time, everyone who was anyone was
called Burke. I am particularly interested in the family Richard Bourke
(-1583) "a Iarain" father of Theobald 1st Viscount Mayo. Richard's wife (the
original marriage was "certain for one year" but could be continued by mutual
consent, which, following a few rough patches, happened) was Grace O'Mally
(many variants of her name) who is the legendary pirate queen of co Mayo, and as
such it is difficult to separate fact from fiction. Its in her issue, by a
previous marriage, who, in 1589, did for my ancestor John Browne sheriff of co
Mayo, an English in-commer, well probably.
Adrian
CED
Hubert's marriage to Isabella of Gloucester lasted only a few days
(Her marriage to Hubert and her death both occurred on October of
1217). She held the vast undivided estates of the Gloucester
inheritance. After the annulment, King John maintained control of her
estates for about fourteen years and then forced her upon Geoffrey de
Mandeville, earl of Essex, with a heavy fine (in 1214). I cannot find
evidence that Essex gained anything from this marriage except the heavy
fine. Hubert could not have married this great heiress without the
approval of William le Marshal, earl of Pembroke. There has been
speculation that Hubert was a place-holder husband to keep Isabella's
estates in tact until after her death when those estates came to
Gilbert de Clare, a close friend of Hubert.
CED
CED
To the Newsgroup:
I made an error as to the circumstances of the 1221 Treaty of Norham.
William the Lion was not there. He had died in 1214. Sorry about
William the Lion's date of death. I was working from memory and forgot
some of the circumstances around that Treaty of Norham. There was an
earlier agreement - 1209 - at Norham at which William the Lion agreed
to the marriage of his daughter, Margaret, to the boy who became Henry
III. I confused them.
I'll try to be more careful in the future.
CED